Civ is not the real world - Learn the Civ rules

[zagnut]

I think one of the most common errors in Civ is to think that the rules are the same as they are in the real world. I know I thought that when I started to play and I see a lot of posts from people complaining that “things like that wouldn’t happen in the real world”. And those folks are right - it wouldn’t - but this is a very complex and interesting strategy game. Sometimes it is hard to realize that because when you are in the thick of a hotly contested game it seems like the “people” on the other side are really thinking. I know that a lot of times I find myself talking back to them!! But just as there are special rules for playing Monopoly, so there are special rules for this monster we have chosen to subdue.

When I first started playing I tried to build my civ as if I were God in the real world. I’m basically a peaceful fellow and I tried to make my subjects happy. I would give them lots of city improvements like cathedrals and libraries, and would always make sure that my cities were growing as fast as possible. After a while I noticed that by the end of the ancient ages I was always behind in techs and generally was in last place on the game score. What’s up, I thought? A benevolent despot or monarch like me should be number 1 in the eyes of my people and the world. Imagine my surprise when the other civs started invading me because I was easy pickings.

That’s when I really started paying attention to the strategy articles written by the good players on this site. Go to the War Academy and read all of the articles. It might take a little while but you can’t help but come at this game from a different perspective after reading them. Pay special attention to the two articles by Cracker. They are not only among the best and clearest, but they also have terrific graphics. He really brings home the point that this is a game based on mathematics. Yep, all of us that slept through algebra and calculus didn’t know that our hobby would be based on it years later.

Anyway, you have to overcome your natural inclinations to be a peaceful, benevolent, lovable old sod and learn the rules of Civ III. After all, we don’t really want to be lovable - we want to win. We want to beat the hell out of the Persians and the Babylonians and all the other civs that are only useful when they pay us a lot of money per turn and give us all their techs. So even though there is no one way to win this fabulously deep and interesting game, I am convinced that your natural inclinations have to be kept in check. For instance, one starting strategy is to keep those cities small, expand fast and attack often. I know it doesn’t seem logical to get big by keeping your cities small in the beginning, but that’s one of the ways to do it. If you get lots of cities there will be plenty of time in the later ages to build them up. And when you do you will probably be the first civ to get tanks and what a great feeling that is. Then you can pummel anyone at will!

So happy building and pay close attention to what Cracker, SirPleb, Aeson, Bamspeedy, BillChin and all the rest say in the War Academy. It’s a second chance to get the education you missed the first time around.

 

[TheNiceOne]

You have good points zagnut, but it seems to me that you now have become too focused on the military aspects. A rapid expansion is important, but its quite doable to build up you empire by peaceful means and only have a small skirmish war or two for the entire game, at least up to Monarch.

Of course, if doing this, rapid expansion is even more important, as you have to reach the good spots before any other civ.

 

[MadHatter]

Where is this "War Academy" I've heard mentioned on and off? In what way is it different from the Strategy Forum and Articles?

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by zagnut
I think one of the most common errors in Civ is to think that the rules are the same as they are in the real world.. . .

I wouldn't go so far as to saying the game should be played as a math puzzle -- that would ruin the game -- but I agree that it is its own world and has its own priorities.

What’s up, I thought? A benevolent despot or monarch like me should be number 1 in the eyes of my people and the world. Imagine my surprise when the other civs started invading me because I was easy pickings.

Now it's starting to sound like the real world again. Where did you read that benevolent dictators were successful in the history of the real world. The good guys win only when they are very, very careful.
Anyway, your main point is well taken.

 

[zagnut]

Mad Hatter:

The War Academy can be accessed from the left sidebar on the main page.

Zachriel:

You are absolutely right, the game is not merely a math puzzle. But Cracker's sites sure rely heavily on the mathematical underpinnings of the game to explain his strategies. I can't bother to do the math before I have my horsemen attack. I just have a feel for the relative strengths. But, I know that I used to forget that it wasn't just a spearman that I was facing, but a spearman in a city built on a hill.